Rocky Balboa
-
Posts
783 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Rocky Balboa
-
-
For those having problems running H2HH on windows 7. Trying starting up the app by running as administrator. You can do this by right clicking on the shortcut and selecting run as administrator from the popup menu.
-
The point I made in the other thread is that knowing the numbers didn't help anybody "debug" the problem for the 4 years of active development of the three games with that data. People saw the numbers and didn't question the results, therefore didn't question the numbers. And yes, armor quality was displayed along with the thickness, angle, armor type, and other factors.
The fact that someone figured there might be a problem WITHOUT data proves that the game has sufficient information to figure out if something is right or wrong. It's not necessary for you guys to figure out the specifics of what a problem is, or it's possible solution, only to note where there's an issue. We can handle it from there, whether it be a mouse cursor that isn't working right, a graphic coming up in the wrong spot, or a shot going through some armor that probably shouldn't.
Steve
I think the sound we just heard is the sound of viewable in game stats slowly slipping down the todo list.
-
Payware mods are not uncommon with racing and flight sims. If they meet a need that is being ignored by free modders/mod teams then that on it's own is a reason to support the concept.
Yep everyone would be on the honor system. Some sharing would take place and that's unavoidable, but if we all agree that designers who are compensated in some way for their work are likely to create more good quality work then those who choose not to pay and try to work around the systems will be the exception rather than the rule.
-
Ive thought about this as well. But the idea of someone saying your work is not up to their standards an cant be allowed on their site is kinda messed up.
Don’t think of it as saying your work is not up to their standards. Look at it as saying here are the minimum requirements you content should have to offer it for sell to the public. BF can set whatever requirements they want. What I posted earlier is just an example .
What about someone just learning the ropes an they want to put their work out there. They would be missing out on potential feedback. Having a few privately test things outs wont give you the range of opinions the forums or repository give you.Posting to the repository currently requires a certain amount of lag time before it appears so most of the community designed scenario that are made now are created and tested using private email and or the forums so that wouldn’t change IMO. If you’re just learning then maybe your first few designs are posted for free until you can build up a reputation with the community. When you see that your free stuff is being frequently downloaded and receiving favorable response then you can offer your next design for a cost.
-
Taxes, intellectual property rights, transfer of funds...too much hassle.
Agreed lots of hassle .... How about all content sold becomes the property of BF and no money is transferred to the designer. Instead BF credits the designer's account toward their next purchase.
-
Charging money for community created scenarios mods etc. would open a whole other can of worms.
Would it present it’s own unique set of issues? Sure it would just like any other application. But keep in mind no one would be forcing a player to sell content at a price. They should always be allowed to offer it for free if they so desire.
I do however believe that even if content is posted for free that some quality standards should be enforced on the repository to make sure that it meets community expectations.
As I stated earlier, I also believe that the quantity and quality of community made content would increase if designers could benefit financially for their efforts.
-
Steve or Anyone on the BF side, thoughts on upgrading the repository or just adding some community made scenarios to the patches?
Many of the scenarios are incredibly well made and I would think adding them in with the description as user made may really help flesh out the game.
The repository is definitely in need of a major revamp. Here’s my .02.
I have no problem paying for good quality content. I think the repository should be setup to allow the players to submit content for sale with a percentage going to BF to cover costs. BF can set the standards for acceptable content just to make sure that the ecommerce site isn't loaded down with a bunch of Junk. Examples of what those standards might be can be seen at the bottom of this post.
I believe capitalism works and if people could earn even a little $ from the sell of their content then there would be much more good content to choose from. User created content can be maps, scenarios, campaigns, even good quality mods are worthy of payment IMO. BF can also set the max price that can be charged for different types of content. I for one enjoy well constructed campaigns, and there is a certain campaign designer that I would have no problem paying $10 for another of his excellent campaigns. Where are you FM Blücher?
Here’s an example of some standards that could be used to evaluate content being placed for sale.
Logical TOE, complete map, clearly defined mission text with clearly defined objectives, clearly defined victory conditions, Multiple AI plans for both sides, Coherent documentation and design notes, Screen shots or videos for buyer evaluations, suggested selling price for the content.
Sample pricing structure for player designed content:
Single scenario: $1.00 - $2.00 max
Campaign: small - $4.00, Med - $7.00, large - $10.00 max.
Maps: small - $.50, med - $1.00, large - $1.50, Huge - $2.00 max.
Mods might be difficult to price but can be priced based on size. $.50 - $1.00 for a small mod on up to $10.00 for a really large Mod would be acceptable IMO
-
I find it interesting the number of players who acknowledge the time and skill it takes to create well crafted maps/scenarios, yet complain that a module comprised mostly of this type of content is not worth the asking price.
Looking at the work JonS put into his excellent campaign alone is worth the price
-
In real life the advantages of having the mortar in the vehicle were:
1. Didn't have to carry it, lug it in a cart, or ferry it around in Jeeps (if you're on the Allied side).
2. Radio and ammo are all right there, ready to go. Again, no need to lug it around and/or wait for someone else to come pick you up.
3. Quick exit plan in the event that someone has taken an interest in your activities.
Steve
Did the vehicle mounted tubes carry a larger amount or greater variation of ammunition?
-
If you've read the books then you shouldn't be surprised that the hobbit movie has some ridiculous moments. It was, after all originally written as a children's story.
So even though PJ took some creative liberties I think it still maintains that child like qualities in some area's. racing bunnies is a good example ...
The LOTR movies for me got more difficult to consume as they went along. Legions of elves showing up at Helms deep as well as Legolistic escapades ruined that epic battle IMO.
Also Lego sliding down the trunk of an Oliphant during the battle of Gondor was another major distraction.
-
If the crew has already expended some ammo they do restock when they are in the vehicle. You can also have a vehicle near a heavy weapons crew and the crew will take ammo from the vehicle. None of this uses the Acquire Command.
Steve
:eek: Do tell? ... I'll have to give this a try.
-
CM without hotykeys sounds like a nightmare of frustration. I think the Steam OS/Box has some potential but for any game that needs hotkeys I'll never use their controller. You can add non-Steam games to your games list for launching so it could work, "technically" but you can already do that now. And for the record I really do like Steam and use it for almost all of my PC game purchases.
I'm taking a wait and see attitude ... we should know pretty soon how well the controller works when the beta users start posting videos and opinions. The controller is really the key to it all and I think valve realizes that if it doesnt provide the same experience that you get from using a keyboard and mouse then it will flop. Hot keys are essential to any RTS and for the record I don't consider CM to be a true RTS.
RTS and FPS players are a big part of steams player base however and if the controller doesn't work just as well as a mouse and keyboard then the RTS players won't have anything to do with it.
-
Looking forward to what impact this might have on my CM enjoyment. Would love to play cm on a larger screen without having to juggle a keyboard and mouse ....
-
Bill,
Since your going to be assaulting the town/Village, are you and C3K playing with the beta version that includes the changes that Steve posted about in the Urban Bone thread?
Would be nice to see those changes in action.
-
I mean, really, a target drives past a PIAT crew within their effective range and they neither hear nor see it? Or, in an earlier AAR, Baneman tries repeatedly to get an HMG team to set up behind bocage in such a manner that the gun, not just the supporting crew's rifles, can fire through and despite repeated tries still fails. AT guns on the defence that have neither moved nor fired are spotted and engaged at 1KM distance in a matter of seconds by a moving AFV. I could go on, but I am sure you get my drift.
AARs seem to highlight issues that in one's own games one might explain away and demonstrate that they are in fact flaws that can ruin a battle that one has devoted considerable time to and in doing so perhaps make one less want to play in the future.
No doubt some of these things may be legitimate bugs that could be addressed. But don't forget these things may seem like bugs to you because you have a Gods eye view of the battlefield. CMx2's goal is to simulate 20th to 21st century warfare while at the same time being an enjoyable game. Real war is not an enjoyable game
CMx2 is a war simulation and you can't forget that stuff happens in war. A RL commander doesn't have the luxury of micro managing ever sub unit in his command. All he can do is place his men in the best positions possible to accomplish his mission. Why didn't the at-team engage that tank? Who knows, maybe some dust here, I tree limb there, a stray round overhead causing him to duck at the last moment.
"I swear leftenant I could hear him coming my way but I never laid eyes on the bugger"
I think we also need to keep in mind that any battle where both sides have equality of force means that one or two mishaps can cause a game to shift one way or the other.
frustrating for sure but there it is.
-
I do not know how many Packs we might make for Normandy. I can think of enough stuff for at least 2, probably more. For example... Free French, Ost Batallion, Festungs Batallion, etc. can be added over time, in addition to the plethora of oddball vehicles.
Steve
Looking forward to more packs ... don't forget the Ranger and Commando formations
-
This thread absolutely underscores the value in good scenario design. Players sometimes focus too much on game visuals, artwork and program modifications. We also sometimes fail to realize how much work, time and dedication goes into making well crafted and researched scenarios and campaigns.
Thanks, Jon S for the awesome dev diary and I can't wait to play this scenario ....
-
Interestingly, I just checked something ingame real quick and actually found another TOE-bug. In the 4th (heavy) company of an SS-recon batallion the ATG-platoon is manned by Heer personell instead of SS.
You might want to post this in the Maps and Mods forums. They maintain a sticky thread there for reporting stock uniform model and texture problems.
-
Just wanted to step in and say I'm enjoying the AAR ... Thanks for taking the time to put it together.
-
Just wanted to step in and say I'm enjoying the AAR ... Thanks for taking the time to put it together.
-
Yeah, there wouldn't be all of this mess if there were some sort of dev diaries or new informations from time to time. Right now there was one list of things that will be in MG and whole big thread about things that would not be included so we were getting worried Yeah, there wouldn't be all of this mess if there were some sort of dev diaries or new informations from time to time. Right now there was one list of things that will be in MG and whole big thread about things that would not be included
so we were getting worried Guys you need to keep in mind that Bf is not a large company with 50 to 100 developers working on these projects. They have very few full time employees and the rest are contract or volunteers. Any time spent doing marketing materials means less time spent working on the game and game content. If they spend time doing videos and dev diaries then the game is delayed even more. If they hire somone to put together more of this stuff then guess what? The price we pay goes up accordingly ... everything costs ....
If you want a dev diary, Jons has done an excellent dev diary on scenario design which is stickied to this forum. Also try to be more appreciative of what efforts they do make to keep us informed. Your criticism of the video that was posted will only serve to make them not want to release information in the future.
-
Just as you might not care about some of the more obscure Airborne forces (British and American) that took part in these battles.
Steve
What no Poles???
or maybe your being deliberately obtuse -
That's why in my opinion they are ready to blindly accept anything BF will do and they will always be happy like those lemmings that Oddball_E8 has mentioned. Maybe it is overstatement but this is how it looked like.
You used the word opinion here and that's exactly what this is all about. Opinions are subjective just like perceived value is subjective. Some may see the list of features in CMMG and have the opinion that it's worth $35.00. Others may look at it and say it's not worth it.
BF doesn't have the luxury of dealing with guess work or opinion they have to be pretty certain how many units they can sell in order to recoup their development costs and hopefully make a little profit. If the end product doesn't have enough perceived value by the majority of customers then BF will lose money. BF is not in this business to lose money so I am confident that the majority will see the value in what is produced.
This doesn't mean that some customers will not. Some may decide to save their money and wait for CM:EF or CM:SF2 . We all don't think the same and we all decide to buy or not to buy for a number of reasons. You my friend, need to decide for yourself and let everyone else do the same. State your opinion yes, but don't insist that everyone see it your way ...
-
But now i'm not sure why they are doing that(whatever they are doing) because most of their customers where not even interested to have something more and would be happy whatever this module would look like
Once again you use the term most as if you have some knowledge of what each customer buys and doesn't buy. My excitement for this module has little to do with what I have seen so far (Even though the Tiger crossing the Arnhem bridge was pretty cool). I will buy this module not because I buy everything that BF puts out but because they have a track record of giving their customers a quality product for the money they ask and I don't think they will disappoint on this one either.
What confuses me is that you admit that you have purchased everything that BF has made so I don't understand why you are so negative about this module. BF has proven that they will give you a quality product that is worth what they charge so at least give them the benefit of the doubt and wait until we have all the information.
Consider this, who has the most to lose if this module isn't worth what they ask for it? For you and me its just a game but for these guys it's much more important than that and I have no problem trusting that I will be completely satisfied with what BF delivers ...
so we were getting worried
New features/feature ideas for CM for the next few years thread
in Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Posted
When using the target ordr from a waypoint. Please make the target line originate from the waypoint and not the unit.
Add the ability to toggle elevation relief lines on the map. This will help you to read the terrain better.
Add FOW terrain at higher difficulty levels.